opposition

Nine months after the US’ January 3 military strikes and kidnapping of Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro, the Venezuelanalysis team got together to take stock of a whirlwind of changes in Caracas’ domestic and foreign policies.

Lead editor Ricardo Vaz was joined by fellow staff members Jessica Dos Santos, Silvana Solano, and Lucas Koerner. They broke down the US’ semi-colonial regime, the gaps between the official discourse and reality, and the prospects for the different political sectors.

Powered by RedCircle

Note: this episode was recorded in Spanish. See the YouTube video above for a subtitled version.

In the rest of the world, the Israeli PM is often blamed for the Iran war. His opponents say he hasn’t been tough enough with Tehran.

When Israel launched a sweeping military assault on Iran with the United States in February, the Israeli government enjoyed overwhelming support from the Jewish Israeli public.

Opposition parties lent their support to the army and backed the audacious step. Enmity towards the government in Iran is an issue mainstream Zionist parties agree on.

Then in June, Israel’s role in the confrontation halted abruptly with an announcement from US President Donald Trump, who said Iran and Israel had agreed to stop attacking each other.

That announcement – and Netanyahu’s decision to abide by it at the time – were unpopular in Israel. According to the Israel Democracy Institute, 65 to 70 percent of Jewish Israelis believe that stopping the war did not serve Israel’s national security interests.

As Israelis prepare to vote in national elections on October 27, Iran remains an important election issue for many. Opposition parties present Iran as an example of what they say are Netanyahu’s many failures. They promise to reset security and foreign policy if they’re elected.

The frontrunner, Gadi Eisenkot, says the conflict is unfinished. While saying that a change in Iran’s government was an unrealistic goal, Eisenkot accuses Netanyahu of doing little to dismantle Iran’s nuclear programme. In September at the inauguration of his new party, Yashar, Eisenkot told supporters: “Ultimately, it must end in the destruction or dismantling of the Iranian nuclear programme, a goal not yet achieved with 440kg [970lb] of highly enriched uranium already there, which could quickly be turned into several nuclear devices.”

Former Prime Minister Yair Lapid, who is now the head of the opposition in the Knesset, accuses Netanyahu of a strategic failure. He recently told the Atlantic Council that toppling the administration in Tehran is a realistic objective that requires a military escalation: “What Israel should do or the alliance should do is bomb all the energy facilities, especially on Kharg Island, but other places as well in order to make sure that the Iranian economy is demolished. And the reason is that it’s the only thing that will overturn the regime.”

Bombing this civilian infrastructure was actually something Netanyahu had lobbied for himself. An international outcry about such bombings likely constituting war crimes and Trump’s refusal to offer backing put the brakes on the plan.

Naftali Bennett, another former prime minister, says Israel must ensure its military dominance over the entire region. For Bennett, toppling the government in Iran and crushing it is a must. But he says that is not enough. The right-wing politician calls Qatar an “enemy” and says Turkiye is “the new Iran”, going as far as saying that military confrontation with the NATO member was inevitable.

“We will build an alliance of moderate forces in the region against the Islamist forces, against Iran, against Qatar, Turkiye and all the radical forces. We will take proactive actions to shape the region,” Bennett recently told supporters.

Eisenkot and other opposition leaders do not rule out renewed confrontations. They focus on their confidence in the military and security establishment in assessing the dangers and dealing with them appropriately.

But opposition leaders have voiced concern that Netanyahu might resort to military escalation before the elections to tilt the balance in his favour or even disrupt them altogether – even though the prime minister said last week that he did not plan to attack Iran before the vote.

Those fears were elevated after Netanyahu posted a video from the Tel Nof Airbase warning that Israel’s enemies might attack before the elections. Other news reports said Netanyahu has shared intelligence on new threats from Iran with the US president.

Netanyahu was quickly rebuked by opposition leaders, who accused him of “political fearmongering”.

Lapid openly questioned Netanyahu’s motives. Lapid also accused him of using the Israeli military and bases as “backdrops” for election campaign videos.

Ultimately, most Israeli opposition parties and leaders aren’t opposed to war with Iran, and many are in fact even more hawkish in their approach towards Tehran than Netanyahu. They just don’t want a new military escalation before the elections.

An alliance of Venezuelan opposition parties has reaffirmed its commitment to exiled Nobel Peace Prize laureate Maria Corina Machado as its leader.

On Sunday, members of the opposition’s Unitary Democratic Platform (PUD) agreed in a meeting in Caracas to “recognise and support the leadership of Maria Corina Machado”.

The coalition also renewed its demand for free elections in Venezuela, following a series of contested presidential votes in 2024 and 2018.

Sunday’s statement included 14 proposals for a democratic transition, including freedom for political parties, the release of all political prisoners and the safe return of those who went into exile.

The announcement also increases pressure on authorities to allow Machado’s return. She has been living in exile since leaving Venezuela last December to receive her Nobel Prize.

“The will of the Venezuelans must once again govern the destiny of our nation,” the opposition’s former presidential candidate Edmundo Gonzalez wrote on social media supporting the proposals.

“We will not accept political prisoners, persecution or a governing power that disregards the mandate of its citizens. Living in freedom and under a genuine constitutional order is a legitimate demand of our society.”

No election set

Venezuela has yet to declare a date for a new presidential vote. Since January 3, the country has been led by interim President Delcy Rodriguez of the long-governing United Socialist Party of Venezuela (PSUV).

PSUV leaders have been accused of carrying out human rights abuses against political dissidents, including arbitrary arrest, imprisonment and torture.

Still, after the United States launched a military operation to abduct and jail former President Nicolas Maduro, the PSUV has remained in power with the support of the White House.

US President Donald Trump has backed Rodriguez’s leadership, despite her having been Maduro’s vice president.

His administration has maintained an active role in Venezuela, exerting control over its oil resources and pressuring the Rodriguez government for reforms.

But critics point out that Trump has been reluctant to push Rodriguez for new elections, opting instead for a three-phase plan that focuses first on stabilising the country and economic recovery before pursuing a political transition.

Machado, meanwhile, has told The Financial Times she would like to see Venezuela hold elections by July next year.

“The US government and the Venezuelan people all agree ⁠⁠that the only way to make ⁠⁠this sustainable and ⁠⁠a real victory is to turn Venezuela into a stable democracy,” she told the newspaper earlier this month.

A thwarted return

Venezuelan authorities blocked Machado’s repeated attempts to return to the country, according to her party, Vente Venezuela.

Machado has also reportedly attempted to petition the Trump administration for help re-entering Venezuela.

Separately, she gifted Trump her Nobel Peace Prize in January, during a visit to Washington, DC. Media reports, however, have suggested friction between the Trump administration and Machado.

In interviews with Reuters and Axios, US administration officials have anonymously expressed frustration with the opposition leader’s repeated efforts to return home, particularly after a pair of deadly earthquakes in Venezuela last July.

Axios quoted one official as calling Machado’s push “political opportunism”.

Machado, however, remains one of the most popular figures in Venezuela’s opposition.

In October 2023, Machado won the opposition coalition’s presidential primary, but in January 2024, Venezuela’s courts blocked her from running in the upcoming race.

The courts upheld a 15-year ban on her holding public office, reportedly due to her support of US sanctions against the Maduro government.

Gonzalez ultimately replaced Machado as the opposition candidate in the 2024 race. Maduro claimed victory for a third term as Venezuela’s president in that election cycle, despite widespread criticism that the vote did not meet democratic standards.

The opposition released vote tallies that appeared to show Gonzalez had won the race.

The US had recognised Gonzalez as the country’s rightful president-elect and denied the legitimacy of Maduro’s election claims.

Machado was previously removed from the National Assembly in 2014, due to her activism against the Venezuelan government.

A third round of talks between the Rodriguez government and the opposition began in Venezuela this month.

But instead of including Machado, the negotiations have involved members of the 2015 National Assembly, which was led by the opposition and dissolved under Maduro.

Still, in a statement this month, the US State Department praised the talks as aiding the Venezuelan government’s reform.

“Political reconciliation talks between the interim Venezuelan government and 2015 National Assembly representatives are producing tangible reforms in civil liberties and political rights, laying the groundwork for credible elections and a democratic transition,” the State Department said.

In February 2014, Venezuela witnessed one of the most prolonged and violent periods in the past 17 years against the nationally elected government.

What began as violence at some of the country’s more elite universities quickly descended into the violent street barricades, known as the guarimbas. Forty-three people, mostly civilians and security personnel, were killed. Entire communities were walled in, their residents blocked from accessing food, transport, gas and even necessary medical services. Buildings were set alight with people inside, hundreds were injured.

The proponents, the so-called guarimberos, called themselves protesters: a claim echoed many times in the international press. But for the government and a vast number of ordinary citizens, they were terrorists.

The anniversary of these events comes at a critical moment in Venezuelan politics: over the past two weeks, the newly elected right-wing legislators in the country’s national assembly have begun pushing for an Amnesty Law. If passed, this legislation would grant a pardon to the most violent perpetrators of the barricades. 

With the perpetrators of these acts potentially about to be set free, many in Venezuela are asking: could more violence be on the cards? To answer this question we have to understand what the violent barricades were, who took part in them and why they eventually petered out. As usual, there is a whole other story that the mainstream media ignored.

Who Were the Violent Barricaders?

Although the international media portrayed the barricades as a spontaneous youth uprising, testimonies that have emerged in the wake of the barricades tell a very different story.

“There were organized groups from within the universities, which were divided into subgroups. People in charge of the distribution of information, photos, and publishing all that, people in charge of planning the routes, people in charge of security… there was organization amidst the chaos,” Gabriel* — an undercover participant at the protests who wished to remain anonymous — told me.

It’s also clear that the “youthful” barricaders didn’t operate alone — although they might have been the official face of the unrest.

In the barricaders’ stronghold of Altamira and Chacao in Caracas, collaborators from private homes to small businesses facilitated the protesters with a network of internet connections and passwords to aid their communications, as well as with food and drink, places to hold meetings or to hide from police. 

But it was perhaps at night when the most sinister and violent elements of the barricades emerged.

“There was a core violent group, but they weren’t students … They really did want to cause big shit, cause confrontations with police, they even intimidated the other guys (barricaders), they said ‘you’re a bunch of pussies, what are we gonna do with this shit?’,” Gabriel said.

“They knew how to act in these circumstances … (the police) launched gas bombs at them, and they all got out the way, grabbed the bombs and threw them back …There were people who really knew about this stuff,” related Gabriel.

The right-wing MUD coalition was a leader of the violence. In the words of one tight-lipped barricader, who also wished to remain anonymous, in response to why the protests had erupted in the first place, he simply replied, “I think it was more because of the calls from the political parties of the opposition.”

Gabriel also stated that the relationship between the MUD and the barricaders was clear.

“None of the protesters at the universities wore their university t-shirts, they all wore Popular Will or Justice First t-shirts … They might have been student groups, but the student councils are affiliated to the political opposition parties and they are accountable to them … There was a feeling among the universities that they wanted to take to the streets. There wasn’t exactly a violent idea there … but it was clear that some people wanted something transcendental to happen, the death of someone, a policeman getting burned…”

And despite the official narrative that the right wing wasn’t violent, “Men on motorbikes circled the camps — no one could get near, not even the police. But by night these … ultra violent radical groups turned up, and they (those students at the camps) let them in.”

But perhaps the most revealing comment in terms of how far the organized right-wing were involved in the 2014 barricades came when I asked what the majority of the barricaders were doing now. 

“Well if I am totally honest, those guys are legislators now,” Gabriel said.

The mayor of Hatillo, David Smolansky, and legislator Gabriela Arellano “were both up to their necks in it,” according to Gabriel. “Those who aren’t in the opposition rank and file, are in prison,” he concluded. 

Mystery Dollars 

Another question mark which also still hangs over the violent barricades is where the money came from to pay for tents, food and drink, transport, walky-talkies, weapons and a whole cohort of other not so cheap items in Venezuela.

While I was informed that many of the barricaders were paid approximately 600 bolivars a day to take part – especially to dissuade people from going on holiday during carnival – Gabriel also confirmed that he was approached and asked if he wanted to “make a bit of money.”

But the currency circulating among the violent barricaders gives even more pause for thought.

“I would actually go as far as to say that there were more dollars inside the camps than bolivars,” stated Gabriel, who added that the guarimbas coincided with a hike in the black market price of the dollar against the bolivar on website, Dolartoday.

What is clear from all this is that the guarimbas were not “student protests” or the youth in rebellion, as the mainstream media portrayed. While there were some middle class students among the ranks who didn’t intend to harm anyone, it’s also true that there were many others who came from Venezuela’s well seasoned and highly organized right-wing student movement and who were happy to flirt with violence, and even to let other other people do the dirty work on their behalf. Likewise, there were evidently highly violent groups within the protests who received funding and military training.

The Fish that Didn’t Want Water: ‘He Who Tires, Loses’

“They lost strength, people came out less and less, maybe we would have achieved something if people had stayed in the streets… Also, because of the places that (the barricades) were carried out, in Altamira, you can’t do anything in Altamira, you have to do this in the center of Caracas,” one barricader, who also preferred to be anonymous, said.

So why did the Guarimbas peter out? From a big protest in Caracas to barricades of main roads in other cities, the right-wing then also set up local barricades in their own communities. 

This was undoubtedly the straw which broke the camel’s back. In fact the barricade slogan, “he who tires, loses,” was meant to inspire people in their local communities to weather the formidable storm.

But the slogans didn’t stop people from getting tired of being barricaded in for months, without access to work, school, health, and food- no matter how disaffected these sectors were from the government.

In fact, the violent barricader I spoke to even admitted that his life in Altamira was “too affected” by the barricades.

Rather than capitalizing on local discontent, the guarimberos managed to alienate their upper and middle class support base by terrorizing them in their own homes. Even their fellow students became sick and tired of the university strike — which meant many were delayed in graduating.

With no desire to engage with the popular sectors in the country’s barrios – who the barricade leaders identified as home to the “Chavista collectives” that were “even more their enemy than the police” — the movement literally had nowhere to go inside of Venezuela. 

“They tried maybe once to bring (the barricades) up here… but the collectives, the organised community, we chased them out,” said community activist Laura from a community radio station in the eastern barrio of Petare, whose local community went head to head with a group of guarimberos, not far from where they had managed to decapitate a motorcyclist in a barbed wire trap. 

“People would do the same again,” she said

2016 = More Guarimbas? 

I was told by another former barricader that “if we have to take to the streets again then we will, but you know that’s not so easy, it involves organization”.

Despite the fact that barricades across main roads and targeted arson attacks continue to take place in Merida and Tachira, as Laura told me, it is unlikely that more barricades on a national scale will erupt this year because the rightwing is focusing its energies on its new found power in the National Assembly, as well as on organizing the recall referendum against president Nicolas Maduro for mid-2016. 

The problem for the right-wing is that the latter requires a much more consolidated level of organization than the violent barricades ever did, and it can’t be pulled off through riding the wave of media lies and discontent.

In order to organize a recall referendum, the opposition will have to collect the signatures of 20 percent of nationally registered voters – that means approximately just under 4 million signatures. And although the opposition won big at the National Assembly elections last December, they only managed to do so because of mass Chavista abstention – not because they substantially increased their vote or political presence. 

In spite of the discontent, says Laura, “the opposition know they still don’t have the people in the street … that’s why more guarimbas would be a last resort.”

And in the meantime, Chavismo is looking to regroup. In the streets, in community media, and in workplaces.

The violent barricades were the result of absolute frustration by the right-wing after having exhausted all options to oust Chavismo. But although the right-wing may have had a short term game plan to deal a series of blows to the government, they have never had an overall long-term political strategy.

While the right-wing National Assembly continues to attempt to weaken the Bolivarian revolution and its gains through legislating and the option of a recall referendum is open, it’s possible that further violence may be kept at bay. 

But if the Supreme Court blocks legislative decisions, or the recall is a failure for the right-wing, “In that scenario, I think it’s possible that all hell will break loose,” states Laura.

Whether it’s 2006 or 2016, violence is always on the opposition’s cards, especially when it has exhausted all other means. 

Caracas, October 12, 2026 (venezuelanalysis.com) – US Secretary of State Marco Rubio hosted Venezuelan opposition lead negotiator Dinorah Figuera on Friday at the State Department in Washington, DC, to express support for ongoing dialogue with the Venezuelan government.

“This is the best opportunity Venezuela has had in almost a generation,” Rubio told reporters, adding that the talks headed by Figuera are “a difficult process” but enjoy “100 percent support from the highest levels” of Donald Trump’s administration.

Rubio stressed that Washington’s goal goes beyond holding elections. “Our desire is not simply for Venezuela to have an election, but also to have a democracy with the institutions necessary to sustain long-term stability, prosperity, and freedom.” The Trump official has insisted on a three-phase plan culminating in a “political transition.”

For her part, Figuera, the president of the defunct 2015 Venezuelan National Assembly, praised the United States for opening a “path of hope for Venezuela” on January 3, when US forces bombed Caracas and abducted President Nicolás Maduro.

“We are committed to restoring the institutional framework of the public powers, the Supreme Court of Justice (TSJ), and the National Electoral Council (CNE). We want to bring the country toward a process that guarantees political and civil rights and creates space for reunion and reconciliation,” she said.

The opposition leader also thanked Washington for its investments in the oil sector. “The restoration of institutions and the country’s economic progress will be two fundamental pillars for building institutions and democracy,” she added. Despite its term running out in January 2021, the opposition majority parliament elected in 2015 retained US “recognition” as Venezuela’s legitimate authority.

Both officials announced that the next round of talks is scheduled to begin on October 14. Rubio explicitly called for opposition unity: “We ask all elements of the opposition, and all sectors of society, to participate in and support this process.”

Neither Rubio nor Figuera fielded questions from reporters as they left the room, including about opposition leader María Corina Machado, who continues to insist that presidential elections must be held “as soon as possible.”

This was the first time Rubio received Figuera in Washington. Since August, she has led an opposition bloc engaged in dialogue with the acting government headed by Delcy Rodríguez, a process promoted by the United States in which the far-right Machado is not participating.

So far, government and opposition delegations have completed two rounds of negotiations in Caracas. Rubio claimed that the talks thus far have resulted in the release of hundreds of people allegedly detained for political reasons, the unblocking of several pro-opposition news websites, and progress toward amending the 2017 Law Against Hatred. The agenda for this third round includes continuing the process to renew the Supreme Court.

In this regard, opposition delegation member Juan Miguel Matheus said his team is “working to ensure that the members of the Judicial Nominations Committee are appointed and sworn in by October 15.” The committee will be responsible for evaluating candidates for the 32 Supreme Court justice positions.

Following an amendment to the Organic Law of the Supreme Court of Justice negotiated at the dialogue table, it was agreed that the Judicial Nominations Committee would have a majority of 12 civil society representatives, compared with 11 lawmakers. A total of 127 citizens applied to join the body.

Once the committee has been appointed, the process of receiving applications from candidates for the Supreme Court will begin. “We invite the best men and women in Venezuelan law to apply for positions in the TSJ’s six chambers. Venezuela needs independent, competent justices of recognized integrity,” Matheus stressed.

While some opposition sectors are demanding that a date be set for presidential elections, the delegation participating in the negotiations argues that progress in transforming the justice system is a necessary prior step.

In his press statement, Rubio added that future rounds of discussions “will address reform of the National Electoral Council.”

The Venezuelan government’s delegation has not commented on the Trump administration’s express backing for the opposition negotiators. 

The two sides agreed to demand the release of 31 tonnes of gold held by the Bank of England since 2019 to address post-earthquake reconstruction needs. The gold, worth more than US $4 billion, will reportedly be moved to the New York Federal Reserve, with its spending subject to US approval and international auditing.

Edited by Ricardo Vaz in Caracas.

Main opposition Congress party announces rally to the top court to demand removal of the chief election commissioner.

The five Buss siblings who voted to sell the family’s shares of the Lakers filed their formal opposition to team governor Jeanie Buss’ attempts to block the sale on Wednesday, calling Jeanie’s petition “legally and factually baseless” in a statement provided to The Times.

“While discussions among the siblings continue, their focus remains on facilitating the proposed transaction and the Trust’s participation in it, while ensuring that all beneficiaries, including Jeanie, are treated equally,” Jimmy, Johnny, Janie, Joey and Jesse Buss said in the statement.

“Today’s filing is a necessary step to protect those interests and ensure the transaction proceeds on schedule.”

The five siblings voted in August to include the family’s 17.82% of the team in the sale from Dodgers controlling owner Mark Walter to Joshua Kushner and Bob Iger. Jeanie immediately opposed her siblings’ vote, saying that the transaction would breach the family trust that states she and her co-trustees Janie and Joey must take reasonably available actions to maintain Jeanie’s role as the controlling governor of the team “on an annual basis during [her] lifetime.”

If the Buss Family Trust sells its remaining shares, Jeanie would be ineligible to serve on the board of governors because the NBA requires governors to own at least 15% of the franchise. Although the Buss family ended its more than 40 years of majority ownership of the team in 2025 by selling to Walter at a then-record $10-billion valuation, Jeanie was to remain the controlling governor for at least five years.

Jeanie and her attorneys filed a petition in L.A. Superior Court about two weeks after her siblings’ vote in which she argued their plan was void.

The siblings’ formal opposition claims Jeanie is attempting to prevent the sale “in order to protect her own personal interests” and her actions “constitute a breach of her fiduciary duties as a trustee.” The siblings believe that with five votes to sell, they have the right to proceed with their plan to sell the shares and distribute the proceeds because they have a two-thirds majority of the living children, as outlined in the trust.

With the latest sale from Walter to Kushner and Iger valued at $12.5 billion, a 17.82% share would be worth approximately $2.2 billion for the Buss siblings.

Rahul Gandhi has been arrested several times at protests demanding the resignation of poll body chief.

Indian opposition leader Rahul Gandhi has been detained for the third time in two days during a protest demanding the resignation of the election chief over a controversial revision of voter lists.

Gandhi and other opposition lawmakers were apprehended by police on Wednesday as they marched towards Jantar Mantar, a designated protest site in India’s capital, New Delhi.

A live feed on the YouTube channel of Gandhi’s Congress Party showed police taking him into a vehicle and driving away. Authorities also detained several other opposition lawmakers and protesters.

Opposition parties, their student units and the “Cockroach” youth movement have been demanding the resignation of Chief Election Commissioner Gyanesh Kumar, accusing the poll body he heads of benefiting Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s ruling Bharatiya Janata Party.

India’s Election Commission has so far removed more than 130 million names from the voter lists, with millions appealing the removals. About 969 million people were eligible to vote in the 2024 election.

Protesters allege the changes disproportionately removed voters who support opposition parties while preserving or adding voters more likely to back Modi’s party.

The commission and government deny the allegations. They say the revision has no political motive but is aimed at removing duplicate and ineligible entries while ensuring eligible voters remain registered.

Opposition lawmakers led by Gandhi protested on Tuesday as well, before police broke up their gathering and ‌‌briefly detained them.

Speaking before his detention on Wednesday, Gandhi said protesters showed up unannounced after Delhi police “stopped” their gathering the day before.

“We will go to the designated protest site, sit there, and tell the country that, for us, Gyanesh Kumar is not the legitimate commissioner,” he told reporters, referring to Jantar Mantar.

“The people who have done this [vote theft] are traitors … Gyanesh Kumar will have to resign,” he ⁠⁠added.

There was no immediate comment from the police on the detentions.

The demonstrations present a new political challenge to Modi midway into his third term, just months after similar protests led by the Cockroach Janta Party ‌‌youth ‌‌movement forced the resignation of his education minister over exam paper leaks.

The “Cockroach” protests, one of the most visible signs of public dissent against Modi’s government in recent years, reflected growing anger over job scarcity, corruption and a lack of government accountability.

Caracas, September 28, 2026 (venezuelanalysis.com) –  The Venezuelan government and delegates representing a defunct, opposition-majority parliament concluded, on September 25, a second round of US-backed talks focused on political and judicial reforms.

The negotiations produced preliminary agreements focused on judicial reform and loosening administrative restrictions on several opposition-aligned news outlets.

The primary advance in the negotiations centered on a comprehensive proposal to restructure Venezuela’s Supreme Court of Justice (TSJ).

According to official statements, both delegations established a seven-person committee to review the qualifications of Supreme Court justice candidates. The two parties also agreed to create a Judicial Nominations Committee within the National Assembly to oversee the selection process for new magistrates.

This committee will oversee applications from legal scholars, public sector workers, and civil society members, subjecting applicants to rigorous constitutional criteria before submitting a final list of recommended nominees for a plenary vote in the legislative body.

Speaking at the close of the talks at the Meliá Hotel in Caracas, National Assembly President and head of the government delegation, Jorge Rodríguez, highlighted the consensus achieved regarding judicial reform.

“We have reached concrete agreements to strengthen our democratic institutions, starting with a transparent process to evaluate and appoint magistrates to the Supreme Court,” Rodríguez stated to reporters. “This dialogue demonstrates that through constitutional channels and mutual respect, Venezuelans can resolve their differences without foreign interference.”

Representatives from the opposition delegation similarly acknowledged the priority of reforming the judicial branch.

Dinorah Figuera, president of the faction from the defunct National Assembly elected in 2025, claimed that the ongoing negotiations are aimed at “re-institutionalizing” the country.

“If the TSJ and the CNE move forward alongside political and civil guarantees, social issues and the health sector must also be linked to this process of re-institutionalization.”

The two sides launched a dialogue process in August, with a first round of talks launching the Supreme Court overhaul as well as a joint initiative to recover Venezuelan gold reserves frozen by the Bank of England. The 31 tons of gold, valued at around US $4 billion, will reportedly be transferred to the US before being used for earthquake reconstruction efforts with oversight from US authorities.

The Trump administration has endorsed the negotiations, with the State Department calling it a “unique opportunity” for a “political transition” in Venezuela. In a press conference last week, US Secretary of State Marco Rubio affirmed that the ongoing talks will “create the groundwork and rebuild the institutions necessary in order to have free and fair elections.”

In addition to the latest judicial reforms, both delegations agreed to lift long-standing administrative sanctions against select media organizations such as El Pitazo, Efecto Cocuyo, EFE Agency, among others.

Several outlets had been subjected to legal investigations or broadcast suspensions after being accused of endorsing or broadcasting content linked to past coup attempts and violent anti-government demonstrations.

The lifting of the administrative bans is intended to restore legal broadcast licenses and digital accessibility to several platforms. Government negotiators emphasized that while media outlets are expected to operate within the bounds of national laws regarding public safety, anti-hate regulations, and constitutional order, the agreement serves as a good-faith gesture to expand freedom of expression and media pluralism in the country.

As the closing of the second round of talks, both the Venezuelan government and opposition negotiators indicated that technical commissions will continue working in the coming weeks to finalize the nomination guidelines for the TSJ magistrates and monitor the administrative implementation of the media agreements. They will begin a third round of talks in October.

Washington’s backing for the 2015 National Assembly to take part in dialogue with the government has exposed rifts among the Venezuelan opposition, particularly with a far-right sector led by María Corina Machado.

A longtime endorser of international sanctions and aggressive regime-change strategies, Machado has reportedly attempted to return to Venezuela in recent weeks after a long hiatus abroad.

According to multiple sources, the attempts to enter Venezuelan territory have been frustrated by transportation-related technical issues; in both air and sea travel attempts, the companies involved cancelled the trips due to operational problems.

Despite a long absence from Venezuela, Machado has retained support in the US political establishment. The United States Senate has scheduled an urgent committee meeting to address the political situation in Venezuela, with lawmakers explicitly placing Machado’s return to Venezuela and her political eligibility at the top of the agenda.

Edited by Ricardo Vaz in Caracas.

Nobel laureate Maria Corina Machado has been living in exile, with plans to return to Venezuela spoiled multiple times.

Hundreds of supporters of Venezuela’s opposition leader Maria Corina Machado have taken to the streets to demand her safe return and presidential elections that could lead to a democratic transition in the country.

In Caracas, hundreds of activists in sky blue shirts – the colour of Machado’s Vente Venezuela party – rode motorcycles through the capital’s main avenues on Sunday, honking their horns and waving Venezuelan flags. Similar demonstrations were held in state capitals, including Valencia, Maracaibo and Merida.

“This is not a matter of parties or politics,” said Flavio Valentini, a Vente Venezuela activist in Caracas who grabbed a megaphone and addressed the crowd. “This is a movement for the people and by the people.”

Machado has been living in exile for the past nine months and has had plans to return to Venezuela spoiled multiple times. Opposition activists have accused Venezuela’s government of blocking her return, a claim the authorities deny. Machado’s party said that on Monday night, the opposition leader made three unsuccessful attempts to return.

“We hope this transition process leads us to presidential elections and consolidates a free, democratic country that will be the main ally of the United States,” said Anthony Romero, a leader for Vente Venezuela, in the nation’s capital.

The government has been widely accused of stealing elections, jailing dissidents and stifling freedom of speech. But late last week, Venezuela released more than three dozen political prisoners following a second round of talks backed by the US between the interim government and the opposition.

Machado, one of Venezuela’s most popular political leaders, was barred from running in Venezuela’s last presidential election by courts under the control of former President Nicolas Maduro. But her stand-in candidate is widely believed to have won the election with almost two-thirds of the vote.

Maduro claimed victory nevertheless and unleashed a violent crackdown against dissidents who protested the official results, forcing Machado and dozens of opposition leaders to go into hiding. Machado smuggled herself out of Venezuela last year after she was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize for her efforts to restore democracy in the country.

US special forces abducted Maduro from his Caracas home in January, but Machado has been unable to return to Venezuela since then.

The government is now led by Delcy Rodriguez, a Maduro ally who has opened Venezuela’s oil industry to foreign investment and is working closely with the administration of US President Donald Trump.

Rodriguez told the United Nations General Assembly (UNGA) on Wednesday that Venezuela would hold elections as part of a transition to “full democracy”, but did not give a date for the vote.

Five opposition leaders agree to cooperate to boost voter turnout to secure a majority in the October 27 elections.

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has criticised the opposition leaders who began coordinating to replace his government ahead of the October 27 Knesset elections.

The five politicians met at opposition leader Yair Lapid’s home in Tel Aviv on Saturday to coordinate their strategy before the elections, Israel’s Channel 12 reported.

In his first response to the agreement, Netanyahu claimed Yashar leader Gadi Eisenkot would seek to form a government with Yair Lapid, Yair Golan, Bennett 2026, Yisrael Beiteinu and Arab parties.

“Only a strong Likud will stop them,” Netanyahu posted on X, referring to his right-wing political party. He posted an AI-altered photo of the politicians meeting where he added United Arab List leader Mansour Abbas and Hadash-Ta’al leader Ahmad Tibi.

The meeting was attended by Lapid, the leader of Yesh Atid; Naftali Bennett, the leader of Bennett 2026; Avigdor Lieberman, the head of Yisrael Beiteinu; Gadi Eisenkot, the head of Yashar; and Democrats leader Yair Golan.

Lapid posted a group picture and a document listing their principles for coordination until the election and afterwards.

Under the document, each party leader pledged to work within their respective constituencies to boost voter turnout and attract support from various sectors of society, to secure a majority and form a new government.

The document also says three joint working groups are to be established within 48 hours.

The first will focus on boosting voter turnout for the bloc and what the opposition leaders described as “safeguarding the integrity of the election”. A second group will draft the basic guidelines of the government the opposition seeks to form, including establishing an official commission of inquiry into the attacks of October 7, 2023, and drafting a new constitution. The third group will coordinate media activity and try to counter what the document described as “fake news and smear campaigns”.

“I am filled with hope again tonight. I am confident that we can win 63 seats and work together to fix Israel,” Bennett, a former prime minister, said in a statement on X.

“We have agreed to fully cooperate until the election, on election day, and after the election, with the aim of forming a government that will fix Israel,” he added.